Traffic Power Structure

By Planka.nu

The modern traffic system is ecologically unsustainable, emotionally stressful, and poses a physical threat to individuals and communities alike. Traffic is not only an ecological and social problem but also a political one. Modern traffic reproduces the rule of the state and capital and is closely linked to class society. It is a problem of power. At its core lies the notion of “automobility,” a contradictory ideal of free movement closely linked to a tight web of regulations and control mechanisms. This is the main thesis of the manifesto The Traffic Power Structure, penned by the Sweden-based activist network Planka.nu.

Planka.nu was founded in 2001 to fight for free public transport. Thanks to creative direct action, witty public interventions, and thought-provoking statements, the network has become a leading voice in Scandinavian debates on traffic. In its manifesto, Planka.nu presents a critique of the automobile society, analyzes the connections between traffic, the environment, and class, and outlines its political vision. The topics explored along the way include Bruce Springsteen, high-speed trains, nuclear power, the security-industrial complex, happiness research, and volcano eruptions. Planka.nu rejects demands to travel ever-longer distances in order to satisfy our most basic needs while we lose all sense for proximity and community. The Traffic Power Structure argues for a different kind of traffic in a different kind of world.

The book has received several awards in Sweden and has been hailed by Swedish media as a “manifesto of striking analytical depth, based on profound knowledge and a will to agitation that demands our respect” (Ny Tid).

• Language: English
• Publisher: PM Press
• Release date: Sep 1, 2016
• ISBN: 9781629632650

Planka.nu

Planka.nu is a network of local organizations fighting for free public transport. It was founded in 2001 in Stockholm, Sweden, by activists from Sweden’s Syndicalist Youth Association. Apart from engaging in public debate, direct action, and guerrilla media, the network administers the “P-kassa,” a solidarity fund covering fines for people commonly known as fare-dodgers, although they are more aptly described as passengers in public transport engaged in an anti-fare strike.

Book preview

The Traffic Power Structure

You’re not born a motorist, you become one.

Mobility and class are tightly linked. Not only because mobility depends on economic resources but also because a society based on the current mobility paradigm—what we call auto-mobility—contributes directly to the increase of economic and social injustice.

It is self-evident that a society prioritizing automobile traffic benefits motorists. It is also true that affluent white men are overrepresented among motorists. A society that prioritizes automobile traffic and sees mobility as a magical recipe for progress sharpens the contradictions between individuals and social groups.

The traffic power structure establishes a hierarchy among different means of transport. The automobile comes out on top. At the bottom we find pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transport. The resources allocated to different means of transport reflect this hierarchy. The superiority of the automobile is the result of a society guided by the principle of automobility, that is, a society in which the automobile gets to define our existence.

This book was written to shed light on the traffic power structure and its consequences. A society based on automobility is not only ecologically unsustainable but also leads to economic and social segregation. Investigating current transport policies while outlining different ones can, in our opinion, contribute to solutions for many social problems.

Automobile traffic turns us into competitors. Who has never felt turning into a bona fide motorist once he or she sits down behind the wheel? Driving a car seems to lead to egotistical behavior almost inevitably. Everyone tries to win at the cost of others. Our fellow human beings—other drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, and the passengers in public transport—turn into obstacles. Let’s be honest: who has never personally felt the aggressiveness and the competitive egoism caused by the automobile? Since we don’t want to encourage such behavior and are convinced that you’re not born a motorist but become one, our aim is to end this particular chapter of human evolution. This requires not only changing the traffic power structure and removing the automobile from its pedestal but also building a society that is based on other principles: a society where no one is forced to participate in the traffic power structure, neither actively nor passively; a society where the satisfaction of human needs and desires comes first; a society that we create together and in which we live together; a society consisting of (local) societies.

Automobility

First, the term automobility refers to all of the institutions and practices that determine the social role of the automobile. Second, it emphasizes this role. Finally, it refers to the discourses that make the automobile the social engine of our time and associate it with freedom, progress, movement, individuality, and independence. The automobile is the socio-technological cornerstone of modernity.

The term automobility is a compound noun bringing together autonomy and mobility—the wordplay with auto in the beginning gives it a nice twist. Today, it seems as if autonomy can only be realized through mobility, and mobility only through autonomy. Automobility is closely linked to the ideology of liberalism, which emphasizes our role as individuals with freedom of choice and, in the most extreme case, questions the existence of society altogether. The notion of the free individual is produced by a certain form of society, and so is the notion of automobility. Without roads, oil, and the auto industry no one could drive a car. But the notion of automobility is an internal contradiction. Motorists drive on roads planned by technocrats and move between residential areas and workplaces whose locations are selected according to economic interests. There really isn’t much free choice.

It is indeed strange that the automobile of all things has become the ultimate symbol of freedom and individuality. The truth is that the automobile belongs to the Holy Grail of modern liberalism: it is subjected to a plenitude of public and private techniques of control. Numerous regulations are required for the automobile society to function: how fast you are allowed to drive, where you are allowed to drive, which direction you are allowed to drive, where you are allowed to park, what amount of emissions you are allowed to discharge, and which risks you are allowed to take. These regulations, and many more, need to be considered whenever you start the engine. In order to enforce them, an apparatus of control disciplines motorists and nonmotorists alike. The alleged freedom of the road correlates to a strict control of movement.

The automobility regime is characterized by a number of immanent, unsolvable, and destructive tendencies. Mass traffic means congestion. While automobility encourages individual use of the automobile, it turns into immobility as soon as people follow the encouragement. Traffic congestion is not an anomaly of the automobile society but its logical consequence. The biggest enemy of mass traffic is mass traffic itself. While mass traffic is required for the image of the motorist’s freedom to shine, it is mass traffic that denies this very freedom.

Mass traffic also means destruction: the climate, our natural resources, our cities, we as human beings, and indeed the entire geopolitical system are affected by acute crises. Climate change is an inescapable overtone to the humming of the engines. The residents of our cities are robbed of their space. Peak oil creates geopolitical crises, even wars, as access to cheap oil must be secured. Every year, 1.2 million people die in traffic crashes.¹

Again, we are not talking about temporary disruptions of a system working fine otherwise. The exact opposite is true: what we describe is the system’s normality. The roads and the cars that have been built for automobility to prosper kill three thousand people every day. But when was the last time we heard a politician criticize mass traffic? Given the current political climate it seems unthinkable that any politician would dare declare war on the automobile. Yes, in Sweden we have Vision Zero, that is, the aim not to have a single person killed in traffic, but this vision is little more than a paper tiger. This is hardly surprising when people try to relieve the symptoms of a problem while ignoring its causes. The traffic deaths are a political problem, but no one sees it that way. It is as if we have surrendered to murderous machines taking over our planet.

It is obvious that in its practical implementation, auto-mobility is not functioning and far from rational. The notion’s inadequacy is also revealed on a theoretical level. Automobility as a system is an impossibility. What is celebrated as a way to freedom and autonomy rests on a tight-knit net of control.

The idea of automobility is directly linked to mass traffic but it also characterizes many other parts of society. If we use the term correctly, it is an excellent tool for analyzing society as a whole, but also for creating radical alternatives, both social and ecological. The term helps us understand the idea of the modern individual and the possibilities (and